RWER issue 58: Bill Lucarelli
A new international Bretton Woods System?
Bill Lucarelli download pdf
Read and leave comments here
Leave a Reply
“a conceivably seminal contribution to this debate on economic systems and their place in human and natural systems.” – Steve Keen
“Some of his insights will no doubt become the key building blocks of the new economics the world needs so desperately today.” – Richard Koo
“This remarkable volume presents the full range of opinions on MMT, from its enthusiastic proponents to its severest critics” – John King
—– look inside —– $5.94 / $20.00
—– look inside —– $4.90 / $8.00
—– look inside —– $15.99
—– look inside —– $5.99 / 12.99
—– look inside —– $5.93 / $12.99
—– look inside —– $4.97 / $9.90
—— Ugarteche, Puyana and Madi ——
Gerson Lima / Maria Alejandra Madi
Edward Fullbrook and Jamie Morgan
————— Michael Hudson ————–
Maria Alejandra Madi / Jack Reardon
————- Edward Fullbrook ————-
—————— Steve Keen —————–
————— Richard Smith —————
————– Gustavo Marques————
– Victor Beker and Beniamino Moro –
————– Lars Pålsson Syll ————-
—————– Stuart Birks —————-
Edward Fullbrook and Jamie Morgan
———— Armando Ochangco ———-
Shimshon Bichler / Jonathan Nitzan
————— Mauro Gallegati ————–
————— Herman Daly —————-
————— Asad Zaman —————
—————– C. T. Kurien —————
————— Robert Locke —————-
Bretton Woods System and any upcoming new system must reconcile issues of ‘opaque and repressive’ regimes prevalent in many developing nations. Natural resources are in abundance in these countries though political class are forfeiting their political credibility in an incessant manner over several years. The ruling and opponent class in many democratic countries and ‘juntas or monarchies or dictatorships’, hence, are accused to be playing in hands of some global forces or nations. Worst-hit is destructive influence of these policies on ‘devaluation, undervaluation or no valuation’ of natural resource of these countries to the detriment of ‘sustainable and healthy growth’ of their economies.Human resources development policies of these countries remain delinked from their ground problems. With diversity of natural resources available in differing geographic situations in these countries, the human resource development strategy for a particular ‘locale or governance unit such as village’ should be different. Strangely, planning process in these countries operates on ‘USSR Model’. For example, bane of India’s politico-economic-social problems could be traced to its approach to solving problems of governance. The ‘third tier of the government, often named, Local Self Government (LSG)’ has no semblance of governance structure as its counterpart exercise in developed nations. Natural and human resources do exist in any locale or habitat and for any economic agenda there is a structural ‘interface’ unit of implementation (of government policies). This ‘locale specific structural interface unit’ is not steered by ‘LSG’ despite consttutional authority in India. It remains in hands of ‘a bureaucracy’ which works with ‘iron hand’ with the ‘ruling class’. There is a widest possible disconnect with people living in ecosystems which are endowed with abundant supply of natural resources. National and supra-national forces ‘bring’ very much biased, flawed and unsustainable models and thrust these models on ‘communities living near to these resources’, often deterimental to their living environment, environmental health and therefore is detached from ‘local economic development (LED)’. New system need to fully reconcile and optimise the ‘LED’ agenda of these units. Tremendous political will is needed to harmonise smallest units of a nation-state with ‘novel or reformed international structure/s’. Internationally, communities are joining hands on their ‘rights’. Though the actions of these ‘community or civil upsurge’ seem local, but ‘strategic frameworks’ are often ‘similar’ throughout the world. A new international forms or units of democracy, are out to seek a newer international politico-economic regime. This is same situation of World War II. WW-II tried to seek ‘economic solutions’ through political hegemony of ‘veto power states’. As the world now is more integrated tha ever, political hegemony has to transcend from its Security Council based ‘intimidation’ to ‘securing peace to economic-ecological units’ spread in all nation-states. Nation-states hence could not practise kind of ‘veto’ akin to Security Council countries. One of the example of the hegemonistic ambitions is that countries like India have also started demanding seat in Security Council. It clealy means international hegemony through Security Council is considered a ‘discretionary power sharing arrangement’. Nation-states are trying to emulate the Bretton-Woods model and other International Treaties or Systems which were product of unique situation of WW-II. In the age of WWW (World Wide Web), the global citizenry is more united than ever in entire histroy of human kind. Strangely, its clamour for universalisation of values of democracy has not been properly assessed. Its stance is very much global, universal as well as its expectations are more and more towards ‘global peace and sustainability’. It is quite intolerant to opaque and exploitative systems of governance, be that even be in the name of democracy. Fundamental upheaval is unleashing all around which needs ‘unbiased, unexploitative’ response. This response has to be bring political action to ‘saving our community’, sort of Agenda-21 type of units. These LSG Units of the world could not be left in the hands of hagemonistic regimes of nation state or supra national arrangements lest there remain a contiunous clamour for ‘radical solution’. As the world leadership could be more informed and mature now than other times of the histroy due to clear emergence of knowledge systems all around the world, it is time for movement to a new international economic order which reconciles local economic-ecological issues with that of nation and global ones. Could that be done? There is no escape rather it has to be done as citizens’ response for action is very well crystallised. We need to create a newer international consensus. We need to have a newer Pact may be at another town such as Bangaloru? Citizens’ Response for United Social Action on Development Economy (CRUSADE) in India was started as a think-tank organisation during movement of Anna Hazare in 2011 on 13 April, 2011 at memorial centre of Mahatma Gandhi located in Rajghat by prominent Gandhian, Prabhat Shobha Pandit and many other intellectual minds. CRUSADE may have philosophy of Gandhi Ji as its political agenda as the main elements of Gandhian philosophy are needed to evolve definite political action. International community may have to bring agreement on some very fundamental political actions. CRUSADE Conference must come up as a PLATFORM akin to GATT which evolved WTO. CRUSADE must bring about newer form of political connect of the units of LSGs with national and supra-national structures. A Meeting of interested minds may be convened by likes of Sri Sri Ravishankar Ji, who believes very much in development of international peace through dialogue and emphasises on bringing a paradigm shift in the ways we assess of our ways of living. If there are multiple ways to transform required for a single community, these multiple ways need to be understood. If there appears a COMMONNESS even in these disparate communities all around the world, it is very much high time for CRUSADE to evolve that kind of consensus sooner than later.